Core Insights - Lighter, a rapidly growing on-chain perpetual exchange, has sparked debate in the DeFi community regarding the tokenomics of its newly announced Lighter Infrastructure Token (LIT) [1] - The allocation of LIT tokens raises questions about fair launches in the increasingly institutionalized on-chain derivatives market [1] Tokenomics Overview - 50% of LIT tokens are allocated to users, partners, and growth incentives, while the other 50% is reserved for the team and investors [1] - Insider allocations are subject to a one-year cliff followed by three years of linear vesting, with 26% for the team and 24% for investors [2] Distribution and Incentives - Lighter has distributed 25% of the total LIT supply at launch, equivalent to half of the ecosystem allocation, through an airdrop tied to its first two points seasons [3] - The airdrop generated 12.5 million points converted into LIT, with the remaining 25% of ecosystem tokens reserved for future incentives and partnerships [4] Revenue and Operations - The company operates from the U.S. as a C-Corp, with revenues from trading and other products allocated between growth initiatives and token buybacks based on market conditions [5] - The announcement has received mixed reactions, with some praising the transparency of the vesting and revenue allocation structure [5] Community Reactions - Concerns have been raised about the size of insider allocations, questioning whether a DeFi-native protocol should allocate half of its supply to the team and investors [6] - Some community members argue that substantial capital and long-term backing are necessary for building large-scale derivatives infrastructure [6] Fundraising and Valuation - Lighter raised $68 million following the launch of its public mainnet, leading to questions about the 24% investor allocation [7] - Independent calculations suggest the implied average fully diluted valuation for the raise is closer to $272 million, rather than the $1.5 billion figure referenced in later rounds, fueling further debate on pricing and dilution [7]